You want to impeach someone who is no longer president?
You KNOW he does!
You want to impeach someone who is no longer president?
You want to impeach someone who is no longer president?
Yeah...you do realize it's a 'thing' right ?
Along with denying the denial which he accidentally didn't deny....
Today we have Maria Butina, the NRA back channel to Moscow. Not only was she connecting Russian money with American politicians through the NRA, but she was using sex for access. They threw her in jail because she is a flight risk and are planning an immediate trial. It appears that back channeling the Russians is going to get the republicans in the back. But then again, he could shoot someone in Time Square.
I just smoked one and then read this.......and then thought of Natasha from Rocky and Bullwinkle...Maybe shes the "urinator" also??
MooseEater, What you say is true, but those were a long time ago. We have been doing much better since. Well, I guess the Iraq war was brought to us by people that hadn't sold us a ton of weapons in a while and figured donating a few of our young men was ok if it helped their bottom line and lined a few pockets.
I'm hoping the corporatism is a pendulum swing that has gone to the extreme enough to wake people up. We did manage to elect Obama and I don't see the trump election as legitimate with the now documented Russian medaling. The upcoming elections will be very telling.
None the less. Wrong is wrong and the new players offer us nothing but grief. Taking care of our own people, educating them and making sure they have affordable medical care should be our highest priority.
The weakness of their religion is part of the problem. Buying forgiveness is like leaving a tip after a meal.
No offence man, but seriously no one is taking that post seriously.....as it was not intended as such. (although I was telling the truth about the caravan I was born in)....
I put it there to lighten the thread up a bit, which it seems to have done...
Its great to laugh, ....'praps you should try it more often?
I think the more glaring and safely-publicized-long-after-the-fact characters are from long ago. Even far away. But we still regularly, as a Nation, align with folks who are anything but what our Nation preaches in its PR campaigns. Essentially, we sleep with street whores, then act surprised when we contract a venereal disease.
The Northern Alliance was largely comprised of the opium warlords the Taliban had shut down, then 'we' tried to shift blame on opium and heroin production in that area, claiming the Taliban (the guys who'd shut down the poppy growers) were the source of a large amount of our domestic heroin/opiate problem, when it's our own NGOs and military; no one else is vacationing in Kabul.
Nearly any time the U.S. has interfered in foreign affairs in the last 60 years, directly or indirectly, often for corporate or military benefit, the majority of the time, we've crawled into bed with folks who lack any scruples resembling what we CLAIM to stand for.
Pick a war, and name the mercenary force(s) that benefitted from a quid pro quo with our State Dept. Mujahedeen made out well with our hardware, including stingers, until they decided to go Jihadi.
It's my opinion that until we seriously narrow who we're willing to form alliances with (as well as getting our own actions more in line with our claimed values), our Nation's karma will continue to bite us in the ass.
I think the more glaring and safely-publicized-long-after-the-fact characters are from long ago. Even far away. But we still regularly, as a Nation, align with folks who are anything but what our Nation preaches in its PR campaigns. Essentially, we sleep with street whores, then act surprised when we contract a venereal disease.
The Northern Alliance was largely comprised of the opium warlords the Taliban had shut down, then 'we' tried to shift blame on opium and heroin production in that area, claiming the Taliban (the guys who'd shut down the poppy growers) were the source of a large amount of our domestic heroin/opiate problem, when it's our own NGOs and military; no one else is vacationing in Kabul.
Nearly any time the U.S. has interfered in foreign affairs in the last 60 years, directly or indirectly, often for corporate or military benefit, the majority of the time, we've crawled into bed with folks who lack any scruples resembling what we CLAIM to stand for.
Pick a war, and name the mercenary force(s) that benefitted from a quid pro quo with our State Dept. Mujahedeen made out well with our hardware, including stingers, until they decided to go Jihadi.
It's my opinion that until we seriously narrow who we're willing to form alliances with (as well as getting our own actions more in line with our claimed values), our Nation's karma will continue to bite us in the ass.
...yeah, it wasn't really you i was speaking to Gypsy, you're not an American so it's no big whoop if you don't know exactly how our system runs, frankly i have only the vaguest idea how your system works.
...but the level of vitriol and ignorance of some of these others is disgraceful, one, it shows how ignorant they are and two, how fucked up our school system has become, i mean i'm betting some of these assholes have degrees, lol.
[youtubeif]https://youtu.be/yRZZpk_9k8E[/youtubeif]
...anyway, the level of hate from some of these fools is disgusting, which is why i mostly avoid these sort of threads.
...personally, as a 63 year old American i believe President Trump has already accomplished enough to prove to ME that he is already the best President to serve in my lifetime.
...and he is an expert at pushing snowflake buttons, lol.
...i predict that the GOP picks up seats in both houses in 2018 and in 2020 President Trump wins by the biggest landslide in American history.
View Image
peace, bozo
UHH, actually no.... you can't impeach a private citizen.
What office will you remove them from?
The Constitution does not limit impeachment to incumbent officials. Article I endows the House of Representatives with the “sole Power of Impeachment” — i.e., the power to file articles of impeachment. It further empowers the Senate with “the sole Power to try all Impeachments.” Significantly, in prescribing the standard for conviction in the Senate, Article I, Section 3 states that “no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two-thirds of the Members present”
Note carefully: The Constitution does not say the impeached person must be a current officeholder. As we shall see, that makes perfect sense: The point of impeachment is to deny power to any person — not necessarily an incumbent official — whose high crimes and misdemeanors have demonstrated unfitness for a high public trust.
The constitutional standard for impeachment also elucidates that incumbency is not necessary. The standard, prescribed by Article II, Section 4, is the commission of “Treason, Bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.” Obviously, one need not be in office to commit treason or bribery; but if one has at any time committed these heinous offenses, one is unsuitable for public office. The same is true, by definition, of “high crimes and misdemeanors,” a term of art the Framers borrowed from the law of England.
holy shit vta, where do you come up with this stuff.......
makes me wonder if this fukwad even realizes that NATO was formed in 1949, five (5!) motherplucking years after the end of WWII.
Glad to see you found the humor that had been elusive for you.
I understand that you are ignorant on how government works but that is no excuse to spread lies. How about you fucking read the Constitution before you sprout off nonsense.
Shit...better yet do a basic search. Let me know if you need help.